Author
Topic: What I am most excited about. What I am most worried about. (Read 1105 times)

Excited about: Software engineering and business model: In an, at this moment, still amateurish but expanding open-source-public-ledger-services-market a incubation company with great own innovation and consulting expertise just makes a lot of sense. And I can hardly stress this too much! (!) All the basic stuff for great success is there. A lot of basic decisions just make sense: The multi chain approach, the insight into the long term necessity for a competitive advantage of any public ledger. And a lot more, you know it...

I wrote "What I am most worried about" and have to admit that that was mostly attention grabbing. But here is what I see room for improvement for: Social engineering

- First, sorry for probably misusing the word. What I mean by social engineering is: Marketing; forming collaborative and symbiotic ties with others who again have mutually helpful ties and so on; leadership (encouraging employees and partners to work most effectively mainly by caring about them and by open and constructive, and therefore encouraging, criticism). Of these three parts: (1) Good leadership didn't strike me as a problem. (2) Marketing is not the most important thing at the moment, except if a flatter coin distribution is seen as a plus for security (potential for collusion is less likely and will create trust in an economies of scale market (think about that!)), a way to widen the supporter and potential developer base and a plus for moral grounds (less attack surface for greedy late comers). So in that sense promoting AGS/PTS in a targeted way (quality supporters/developers) makes a lot of sense, especially because flat coin distribution is something that big money can not replicate easily. The most crucial thing (aside from software dev of course) though at this stage (of business development) imo is making strong ties with good developers, other communities, industry leaders, influential angel investors etc. Why? See next bullet point.

- Consulting, Venture Capital / financing and Bitshares X (all of these are III fields) all depend a lot on reputation/trust in the system (BTS X) and the credibility of the people that are behind it and offer incubation and consulting services. Plus the representative model now where some of the representatives might come from within III. There is Ethereum and Charles H as an example. In any war/fight both parties loose and those not participating in the war but doing peaceful business/trade among each other will flourish. So there is no value in fighting except for the value that comes from an assurance of one's identity by strengthening his/her community identity by delimiting your group form the other group. Ethereum is just an EXAMPLE. Adam b Levine could be another example. But I am positive that he is back and contributes to III's development with his critical mind and his quality to be heard out there (his voice is like a metaphor for that). Let's be inviting, encouraging and humble towards each other. That is also: Suggesting a common ground and giving credit to the other one. People just like the feeling of being encouraged and respected and will give that back at some point. This will create the biggest incentive to look at III's business model (for angels) and III projects (for developers) and bring the most quality people here. Why? Because being polite and encouraging is superior (most visible when one is under attack). The one that smiles is not afraid. And people like to go with the superior individual/group. Being negative and overly defensive is a sign of inferiority. Good thing is, this is all a matter of practice ONLY! So why does this matter? See next bullet point:

- What will this space look like in half a year or in a year or in five years? I think we will see strong competitors to the III business model (profitable decentralized apps, incubating and consulting) that are run by top tier software development professionals that are backed by the money and the connections of mainstream venture capitalists and cooperating non software development industries. III surely has the first mover advantage for what they/we do. But if it works they have shown that first mover advantage doesn't count much (Bitcoin). Long term, the companies with the best approach to technology AND social engineering (apart from a good corporate structure) will run this multi billion dollar industry. The open source nature of the public ledger services industry and the fact (will soon be a fact) that more bright and innovating professionals will come to this industry (if it proves to have the potential it promises) will make this business be contingent mostly on a competition for the best developers and therefore a competition of funding, business connections and reputation. To say that as soon as others will form competitive ventures III will have such a head start that the sky will come closer forever, would be arrogant. "Pride comes before a fall"...

- Miner off topic point: Being perceived to be holding extreme/extremist political views. Please check my sentence again I said "perceived". In my opinion there is no such thing as an extreme/extremist political view (in a negative sense) when the reasoning for it is sound and rational and the differences of all kinds of valid views comes down to different moral values (moral values = Feelings about which kind of society one would feel comfortable living in; Feelings are subjective -> Reason for the possibility of the parallel existence of different valid views). Anything should be discussed openly always with goals and assumptions made explicit. But the mainstream puts everyone into categories and is afraid of views that are categorized as too far of without looking at the arguments in a differentiated way. I would not argue to be non-political but holding far of mainstream political views IN COMBINATION with aggressively attacking other views, authorities and institutions and therefore the people for who those views and institutions provide a kind of mental security (part of their identity, subjective feelings that can get hurt) might not help to make our visions reality. Attacking mainstream might have gotten applause when talking to a small crypto insider community but that game has changed. I would: (1) Speak in positive terms: What benefits do we all get form this etc. (2) Provide the technology that allows the change without accusing anyone or any group in a moral way. This would just hinder our chances of bringing as many people to use the technology. Conclusion: Great stuff ahead! Good luck at the conference!! Can't be there but looking forward to it!

Edit: To prevent any misunderstanding: This is not at all about being unhappy with anything III does. On the contrary! I just think that the exchange of constructive criticism (and the NATURE of complex human ventures is that they are never perfect) is a competitive advantage to any development team / community. Let's use the variety and competition of perspectives to our advantage.

2. Give the community a space to propose bounties and resource allocation.

Each time in these threads I propose some random thing, and so does everyone else.

Here is an example: Headhunting for talent on a case-by-case basis is insufficient. Build more pylons. Get people to organize meetups at universities; offer 100 PTS for each well-organized meetup.

What happened here is that I spent a few seconds of my time coming up with a creative suggestion for how to allocate resources. Now this suggestion is sitting in some critique-thread going nowhere. Even if I created my own thread with that suggestion, there would be no real incentive for me or anyone else in the community to propose other suggestions. How do we solve this problem?

You award people who propose bounties a percentage of the bounty (or resource allocation), 1. if it is accepted 2. if and when it is paid out.

This in combination with a propose bounty (resource allocation) section would effectively spice up the creativity of how you guys allocate resources. You'd still be 100% in charge of allocation, but you'd get solutions to problems you have never even considered, and you will get creativity that go beyond your own thought-cones.

- Bitshares is so far ahead of the curve with regards to understanding the potential of and developing ducks in so many exciting areas.- On the technical front it seems like Dan is a few moves ahead, anticipating problems other people aren't even thinking about yet and already implementing solutions to solve them. - Bitshares X, the value proposition is just so clear vs. the existing status quo, this one DAC & its successors can completely change the face of finance. Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What am I worried about?

- Social consensus, third parties that haven't been working with Invictus honouring AGS/PTS - Personally I don't necessarily see that happening.- Dan heavy, if something happened to Dan, my investment would be worth a lot less. (But I guess that is the case with a lot of companies in the beginning.) - Marketing, it's very good (Really liking the evolution of the website) but it's not incredible yet. Particularly with regards to advertising, I would like to see more videos and adverts, that I can share with friends. (I know they're coming... slowly ) I also think anticipation with regards to how the market and public will respond to certain product and branding decisions might not at the same gifted level as other areas. When marketing strong talent weak vultures start preying on some DAC's before they become established this could surface as a potential vulnerability.

At the moment I'm seeing better and better explanations about how it works but the marketing seems to be missing the sales pitch, the part that will get new people interested and excited enough to find out more about how it works. The monopoly style summary on http://bitshares.org/banking/ is quite good and is the right kind of idea but personally I found this particular explanation Bytemaster gave in response, quoted below, to someone asking about Bitshares X just BRILLIANT!I think something like this would be better than the graphic or maybe work well used in combination to advertise Bitshares X to newbies on a JPEG, the website, Bitcointalk, Reddit & in the Bitshares video style. (Ie. a Bitshares X advert & video to get them interested and a separate Bitshares X video to then explain how it works.)

BitShares is a revolutionary new bank and exchange that could rival the value of the largest banks in the world such as JP Morgan and Bank of America in just a few years. How could this new upstart grow so quickly? BitShares offers a bank account that earns 5% interest where funds can be transferred in minutes anywhere in the world with more privacy and security than a Swiss bank account. Your account can never be frozen, your funds cannot be seized, and the bank can never face collapse due to loan defaults or fraud. All of this is made possible without requiring any employees, lawyers, regulatory compliance, vaults, buildings, and other infrastructure required by traditional banks. Unlike existing banks, you can hold your balance denominated in gold, silver, oil, or other commodities in additional to national currencies while earning 5% interest.

In addition to acting as a bank, BitShares also serves as an exchange where currencies, commodities, and stock derivatives can be traded with most of the features used by professional traders including shorts and options. The Bank takes a cut on every transaction and pays 100% of these transaction fees as dividends to the shareholders. BitShares can achieve this feat using the same technology that makes Bitcoin possible, irrevocable decentralized automated consensus forming.

For a quick comparison of BitShares to Bitcoin you can view Bitcoin as stock in a company that earns no profits, pays 100% of its revenue to security guards, and then debases shareholders by 12% per year to fund security. Despite the inefficiencies and costs, Bitcoin has grown to be worth over $12 billion dollars in less than 5 years. How much more valuable would Bitcoin be if it could turn a profit while offering far more powerful services? The value of owning shares in this new Bank will exceed two times the value of all balances of in gold, silver, oil, and currency accounts. If the largest banks can achieve deposits of over $1 trillion dollars with no meaningful interest, how many deposits could BitShares attract and what would that mean for the value of the bank?

Out of all my investments, Bitshares is the one I'm most excited about, so on the whole yeah pretty excited!

Considering where Bitcoin was when it was the same age as BitShares is now, we seem to be making pretty good progress.

Granted, Bitcoin had no competitors at that time, and the underlying technology was unfamiliar because it had been proven to be impossible for the preceding quarter-century, whereas the market that BitShares is wading into is dynamic and infested with piranhas, sharks, and snakes. Nonetheless, the pace is impressive, and much hinges on the next few months.

- Bitshares is so far ahead of the curve with regards to understanding the potential of and developing ducks in so many exciting areas.- On the technical front it seems like Dan is a few moves ahead, anticipating problems other people aren't even thinking about yet and already implementing solutions to solve them. - Bitshares X, the value proposition is just so clear vs. the existing status quo, this one DAC & its successors can completely change the face of finance. Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When I explain BitShares to people for the first time, they grasp BTS ME much more quickly than BTS X. However, some few have sworn mildly, when they finally got how BitAssets work.

"A BitUSD is like a Ziploc bag filled with $1 worth of something like Bitcoin that you can spend from a wallet in exchange for $1 worth of something else. If the value of the stuff in the Ziploc bag changes, this is a magic Ziploc bag that can add and subtract the crypto-stuff to keep the value within a narrow range." (How this really is done is incidental. That it can be done borders on magic.)

- Social consensus, third parties that haven't been working with Invictus honouring AGS/PTS - Personally I don't necessarily see that happening.

Social Consensus really does need to be explained over and over and over, as Stan keeps doing. Why give your 'coins' or 'shares' away to random strangers, who might or might not even hold on to them, when you can distribute some of them to a ready-made early-adopter market?

"B-but why should I g-give my coins away?!?"

"If they are mined, then you are giving them away to random strangers, who more likely than not are mine-&-dump speculators who quite possibly have no concern for your long-term success."

"Y-yeah, b-but why should I g-give my coins away?!?"

"You need someone to make a market in them. If you issue them and try to sell all of them into the market, how will market participants know what they are worth?"

"I... I don' knowww... It all sounds kind of fishy to me..."

That's about where we are now. I expect that things will be different in a few months, after some DACs have been released, and people can see how the process works.

- Dan heavy, if something happened to Dan, my investment would be worth a lot less. (But I guess that is the case with a lot of companies in the beginning.)

Having one individual serve as both Jobs and Wozniak is a concern.

On the other hand, Dan's assignment is finite. He is building a set of Legos that entrepreneurs should be able to cobble together in clever ways. There are only so many fundamental building blocks needed, before the BitShares vision can be decentralized.

We are still at the stage where Bitcoin was, before Satoshi Nakamoto released the first Bitcoin alpha. If he had been hit by a train between the release of the White Paper and the release of the alpha wallet, we probably would not be having this conversation. Once it was released, Gavin and all the others were able to take over.

Bitcoin is one application. BitShares is the electron, neutron, and proton of a new industry.

If Dan can get these fundamental DACs released, the rest of us can use them to invent Financial Chemistry.

At the moment I'm seeing better and better explanations about how it works but the marketing seems to be missing the sales pitch, the part that will get new people interested and excited enough to find out more about how it works.

Until BTS ME and BTS X are released, slick videos and logos on magazine covers could serve primarily to raise expectations and frustration levels, if some of the comments on this forum are any guide.

What we really need is something that we can demo, and some very clever young men are working diligently on that.

- Bitshares X, the value proposition is just so clear vs. the existing status quo, this one DAC & its successors can completely change the face of finance. Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When I explain BitShares to people for the first time, they grasp BTS ME much more quickly than BTS X. However, some few have sworn mildly, when they finally got how BitAssets work.

Yeah that's true. When I say it's 'just so clear' I mean it's clear to me how it could transform finance, but in terms of explaining the opportunity to other people, yes it's hard to grasp at first, which is why I guess I wanted to draw attention to the marketing of it as well.

- Social consensus, third parties that haven't been working with Invictus honouring AGS/PTS - Personally I don't necessarily see that happening.

Social Consensus really does need to be explained over and over and over, as Stan keeps doing. Why give your 'coins' or 'shares' away to random strangers, who might or might not even hold on to them, when you can distribute some of them to a ready-made early-adopter market?

I suppose I just haven't seen enough real world examples of this concept in action. Stan did point out that SiliconValley Coin is predicated on a similar idea. To a certain degree the Aurora/Spain Coin are examples. I can also see the potential value of Dogecoin (I don't own any) drops, for network and viral marketing impact for example. So as you say, maybe after some DAC's have been released I'll start to get/understand more how the process works.

At the moment I'm seeing better and better explanations about how it works but the marketing seems to be missing the sales pitch, the part that will get new people interested and excited enough to find out more about how it works.

Until BTS ME and BTS X are released, slick videos and logos on magazine covers could serve primarily to raise expectations and frustration levels, if some of the comments on this forum are any guide.

What we really need is something that we can demo, and some very clever young men are working diligently on that.

That's true and there's also some value to being a bit under the radar until it's up and running.